The United Kingdom Elections 2010

[Subotan]

Or North Korea or Iran or anyone else who is trying to aquire nuclear weapons and may do so in the future. Just because it doesn't seem a likely threat in the next 10 years, does not mean it won't be in the next 20 or 30 years. If we give up nuclear weapons it will be far far more difficult and expensive if we need them again in the future. As for Clegg's nuclear deterrent lite that he seems to think possible, I believe that just demonstrates he is living somewhat in la la land. A sea-based nuclear deterrent is the most cost-effective option whilst still actually maintaining an effective deterrent, other methods just aren't as reliable or are open to pre-emptive attack, which is why we ended up with a sea-based nuclear deterrent in the first place.

North Korea has neither the technology nor the will to nuke Great Britain, and if Iran was mad enough to actually use the weapons it's trying to get, it would rather have the "Zionist State" burn in flames along with Iran than the "Little Satan". Of course, then there's Russia and China, but an attack from both in the medium term seems very unlikely.

That said, it would be stupid to permanently discard our ability to do our bit into turning the Fallout series a reality. A replacement for Trident should be looked at when we have the resources to fund it.

Apart from the fact one of Cameron's manifesto pledges is to hold a referendum if any further power is to be handed over to Brussels.

Did that happen in the formation of any Federal state? If the USA had been subject to such conditions, then America as we know it wouldn't exist. Neither would Germany. Or India. Direct Democracy like that is dangerous and potentially illegal, as EU Law has supremacy over British law.

That very much depends on what you define as "strengthening European institutions". This really boils down to a fundamental question of whether the EU will inexorably continue to integrate into a completely federal institution or if it is possible to stop and not have deeper integration. Personally I feel too much power has already transferred to the EU and that governments (of both parties) should have made a stand earlier and put a block on deeper integration. Unfortunately there are a number of EU nations that do push for ongoing deeper integration and they seem to have prevailed.

I would feel uncomfortable with further integration if certain EU institutions did not undergo radical reform. However, the ability of the EU to undergo that reform is lacking, as it is not strong enough to overcome the objections from single member countries. It's a real catch-22 situation.

For example, I would burn the Strasbourg Parliament to the ground, consolidate the four separate Presidencies of the EU into a single one, draw up a constitution that has a maximum length of 30 pages, make the President directly elected, synchronise national elections with European ones etc. These would all strengthen the European Union, but they would lead to a vast increase in both accountability and efficiency.

Working within the EU system is the only way those goals can be achieved, and regardless of the aims of the Tory Party, they simply cannot affect the debate from their position. It's like the USA refusing to join the League of Nations.

or just tax less based on the principle that consuming forty plus percent of the wealth of the nation is both immoral and an excellent way to retard growth in the coming decades.

A banker being taxed less for his capital gains than a cleaner is for her income is far more immoral than the state spending (Not consuming; that's what the private sector wants the people to do). And progressive taxes don't retard growth, as they encourage consumption by the public.

a referendum lock combined with the euro train-wreck puts the whip firmly in Camerons hand, he'll do a much better job of keeping britain in the slow-lane of euro-integration than either of the other two parties.

A referendum lock can easily be screwed up into a ball and chucked into wastepaper basket of Euroscepticism when a non-Tory government gets into power, thanks to the British uncodified constitution, and the Tory's policy of refusing to codify it. Sure, the likes of Heffer and Hannan would huff and puff and get mighty cross, but then they wouldn't vote for anyone but the Tories anyway, so the point is moot.